Solo

NR, with respect, I think the original Jacobite ecstatic congregation in Jerusalem has very little in common with modern Pentecostalism. They are both revivalist movements but their degree of 'absorption' in God is vastly different. Pentecostalists today, get themselves into the 'joyous' state of mind, let their hair down, do a bit of their speaking in tongues, but at nine they are back home watching television and next morning at nine in the office filling orders for chicken feed (actaully I am describing some real people I knew once in Portland, Oregon). This is not how the original brothers of ecstasy lived. They were with God and in the service of God from the time they rose in the morning to the time they fell asleep at night.

There is a brilliant film about contemporary Sufi ecstatics by the Turkish director Ozer Kiziltan released in 2006 and widely acclaimed in Europe. It is called Takva (or via: amazon.co.uk) ("Man's Fear of God" is the official rendering of the title although, the term I am told is something closer to "God's (Sometimes Frightening) Omnipresence in Man's Life"). It is a profound, very funny, and moving account of a change in the life of Muharrem, a humble brother in a Sufi lodge, come as a result of his spiritual leader's following God's command received in a dream to appoint him as property manager. The movie provides great insights into the mindset of an ecstatic religious order "absorbed in God". Even admittedly it is a contemporary setting and the Sufi mystics ideas are not a replica for what is known of Qumran and Jerusalem ages ago, it is still telling of the ins and outs of faith, and living a life. Warmly recommended.

Jiri

No Robots

Oh, for sure, there is a lot of "playing at" among today's Pentecostals. But I can tell you that "playing at" something can have dreadful real-world consequences, especially when political elites play along, too.

Thanks for the film tip. I'm definitely interested.

aa5874

Chrysostom's statement has very serious historical implications. How could it be that the assumed close associate of PAUL who supposedly wrote the Gospel of Luke, travelled and preached all over the Roman Empire and was a physician be not known to have written Acts of the Apostles?

And how could it be at the end of the 4th century, Acts of the Apostles is not even known to have existed?

Supposedly since, the 2nd century, a writer called Irenaeus appears to know of Acts of the Apostles. The writer using the name Irenaeus made reference to the day of Pentecost when the disciples received the Holy Ghost.

Against Heresies 3.12.1
Acts of the Apostles 2:14-17 Earlier, Justin Martyr wrote NOT a single thing about the day of Pentecost, the single most important event after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

But it is even more significant or troubling to note that the Gospel writers, who supposedly wrote AFTER the day of Pentecost Holy Ghost event, AFTER the disciples supposedly talked in tongues, did NOT put any words in the mouth of their Jesus about this extremely important event where the disciples were to wait in Jerusalem and would be able to speak in tongues or become multi-lingual instantly by the Holy Ghost of God.

Jesus taught his disciples that he would resurrect on the third day, but did not teach them that they would ALL become multi-lingual instantly by the Holy Ghost.

The talking of tongues appears to be late, after the Gospels. And who talked in tongues the most?

PAUL!

1Corinthians 14:18 - Chrysostom seems right, not even the authors of the Jesus stories knew about Acts or the day of Pentecost when the disciples ALL became multi-lingual.

The Pauline writer and Acts are all after the Gospels, not even Jesus in the Gospels taught his disciples they would be instantly multi-lingual during the single most important event after the resurrection and ascension on the day of Pentecost.

Clivedurdle

Could the passage in Acts be based on Irenaeus?

Clivedurdle

And don't tell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft

and his mates that they are members of a sect and religious practice that is completely unrelated to what they believe it is related!:devil1:

Clivedurdle

And that of course was originally written.....

Do we have another example of someone looking for fulfilled prophecies to justify their theological system and picking on an ecstatic behaviour as evidence?

Exactly what Pentecostals do now?

Midrash?

dog-on

AA, I see this as just another piece of evidence for Marcion's priority, re: Paul.

andrewcriddle

Eusebius of Caesarea was accused of heresy over his doctrine of the Godhead (although not primarily over his doctrine of the Holy Spirit). Andrew Criddle

gurugeorge

Yes, this is where the meat of it is: the first Christians must have been ecstatics - either in the HJ or the MJ scenario, but it's much more fitting for the MJ scenario. (For the HJ scenario, one has to say that they're so ecstatically passionate about their teacher that they see him as an incarnation of God, or something like that; it's either that, or the (I think somewhat even more implausible) alternative, that his crucifixion led to a cognitive dissonance that could only be assuaged by the notion that he had resurrected.)

Thanks for the pointer, that film looks fascinating!

Re. the OP: in one of Ehrman's books recently, I read that there was a certain period when prophecy, the revelation of new texts, etc., was outlawed by the orthodoxy. The kind of thing "Paul"'s congregation indulged in (prophecy, inspired babble), and no doubt the kind of practice that led people to write down their visions as "gospels", later became frowned upon, as the canon was solidified, and orthodoxy said "enough is enough".

Perhaps Eusebius is simply down-playing ecstatic and mystical experience by omission.

No Robots

These two actually go hand-in-hand, and are more than plausible. The great leader left an indelible impression on his followers that continued to grow after his execution. It was only natural for them to make a link to God, as Spinoza points out:

[A] man who can by pure intuition comprehend ideas which are neither contained in nor deducible from the foundations of our natural knowledge, must necessarily possess a mind far superior to those of his fellow men, nor do I believe that any have been so endowed save Christ. To Him the ordinances of God leading men to salvation were revealed directly without words or visions, so that God manifested Himself to the Apostles through the mind of Christ as He formerly did to Moses through the supernatural voice. In this sense the voice of Christ, like the voice which Moses heard, may be called the voice of God, and it may be said that the wisdom of God (i.e. wisdom more than human) took upon itself in Christ human nature, and that Christ was the way of salvation.